manage_proxmox_vm

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description only lists actions and does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide. Annotations already indicate idempotency (idempotentHint: true) and non-destructive/non-read-only nature. The description adds no additional insights about side effects, error behavior, or permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence of 15 words, front-loading the purpose and listing actions. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain return behavior, effects of actions, or prerequisites. It lacks completeness for a mutation tool, especially with many sibling tools requiring differentiation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 100% coverage, providing descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, such as usage tips or ordering. Baseline 3 is appropriate per guidelines.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool manages a VM or container and lists the specific actions (start, stop, shutdown, reboot, reset, suspend, resume). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'control_vm', which might have overlapping functionality.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context for prerequisites, when-not to use, or which sibling tools complement or substitute this one.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.